Prohibition, Yea or Nay

[Mansquatch]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I was physically compelled to stay at the table until I ate my broccoli. Is that a threat of violence?

What was the penalty for leaving?

[The Nehor]

58 minutes ago, Mansquatch said:

What was the penalty for leaving?

I do not know. I was too intimidated to find out.

[kllindley]

2 hours ago, pogi said:

I appreciate both of your input.  I respect your opinions (both of you) and experience in this matter (Bernard).  While I appreciate your intent and desire to rid the world of pornography - on that we are 100% in agreement - we only differ in approach.  Through my recovery process I have learned a lot about myself, human nature, and about the adversary in regards to this problem.  The adversary has effectively distracted our attention away from the real problem - drawing our attention and rage at the symptoms of a disease rather then the rotting core.  I was not able to find lasting sobriety and recovery until I learned what the enemy and battle was really about.  Sobriety is not recovery.  Without addressing the core issues, sobriety is simply a diversion.  Trying to solve the porn problem by making it illegal is like trying to put a lid on a 2 liter bottle of soda that has dry ice in it.  Unlike a 2 liter bottle, humans have many pores or outlets.  If you cover one pore, the soda will simply erupt out another pore.  If you effectively cover all the pores without addressing the core problem of dry ice, then there will be an inevitable explosion.  We need to stop trying to superficially cover the pores.  Instead we need to focus on removing the dry ice.  Because even if you successfully eliminated all porn from the world, the dry ice would still be festering and erupting in different societal/spiritual ills

I am thoroughly convinced that the vast majority of societal ills find their core in toxic shame.  That is not something that we can legislate away.  It is a problem that needs to be heard and understood.  The burden lies in religious institutions, in the home, and societies to heal (not fight) this problem.  It has been shown that AA had a more robust and positive affect on society and drinking habits then prohibition ever did (see the OP).

This is not a problem that government can fix.  We may be able to effectively reduce porn use through legislation, but all we are doing is diverting the eruption to a different and equally damaging pore.  It is a total waste of time, money, and resources.  The solution is not the sword, but the word of God.  We need to stop fighting this problem of porn, because that often reinforces toxic shame, making the problem worse.  Instead, we need to start healing this problem of toxic shame.  That is the only solution.  I have a LOT that I can say about that, and wish that I could effectively share my insights with the world because I am convinced that we have been beguiled/distracted, and are fighting ghosts while the real adversary is tearing up our homes.     We should not turn to the government to fix this problem - because they can't!  Fighting porn through prohibition will backfire.  That is a promise.  We will only feed the underground market.  It will only fuel an underground industry that will make Al Capone look like Mickey Mouse.  It will make the illegal drug trade look like a lemonade stand.  If you think drug lords are big, bad, and ugly, just wait until you see the birth of the porn lord.  That is my worst nightmare!  And we would be responsible for feeding that nightmare. 

We may disagree on the principle of liberty, but I am opposed to the idea of prohibition for far more reasons then to simply preserve our liberty.

Meerkat, you are right, pornography is the antithesis of spiritual freedom and liberty.  It is the face of spiritual captivity, but it is not the cause or the core.  Prohibition will not free us from that spiritual prison, at best it will only give it a new face. 

Preach, brother! It is my hope that people will listen to your perspective and understand the truths you are sharing. 

[Meerkat]

4 hours ago, pogi said:

I appreciate both of your input.  While I appreciate your intent and desire to rid the world of pornography - on that we are 100% in agreement - we only differ in approach.  Through my recovery process I have learned a lot about myself, human nature, and about the adversary in regards to this problem.  The adversary has effectively distracted our attention away from the real problem - drawing our attention and rage at the symptoms of a disease rather then the rotting core. 

I was not able to find lasting sobriety and recovery until I learned what the enemy and battle was really about.  Sobriety is not recovery.  Without addressing the core issues, sobriety is simply a diversion.  

I am thoroughly convinced that the vast majority of societal ills find their core in toxic shame.  That is not something that we can legislate away.  It is a problem that needs to be heard and understood.  The burden lies in religious institutions, in the home, and societies to heal (not fight) this problem.  It has been shown that AA had a more robust and positive affect on society and drinking habits then prohibition ever did (see the OP).

This is not a problem that government can fix.  We may be able to effectively reduce porn use through legislation, but all we are doing is diverting the eruption to a different and equally damaging pore.  It is a total waste of time, money, and resources.  The solution is not the sword, but the word of God.  We need to stop fighting this problem of porn, because that often reinforces toxic shame, making the problem worse.  Instead, we need to start healing this problem of toxic shame.  That is the only solution.  I have a LOT that I can say about that, and wish that I could effectively share my insights with the world because I am convinced that we have been beguiled/distracted, and are fighting ghosts while the real adversary is tearing up our homes.     We should not turn to the government to fix this problem - because they can't!  Fighting porn through prohibition will backfire.  That is a promise.  We will only feed the underground market.  It will only fuel an underground industry that will make Al Capone look like Mickey Mouse.  It will make the illegal drug trade look like a lemonade stand.  If you think drug lords are big, bad, and ugly, just wait until you see the birth of the porn lord.  That is my worst nightmare!  And we would be responsible for feeding that nightmare. 

We may disagree on the principle of liberty, but I am opposed to the idea of prohibition for far more reasons then to simply preserve our liberty.

Meerkat, you are right, pornography is the antithesis of spiritual freedom and liberty.  It is the face of spiritual captivity, but it is not the cause or the core.  Prohibition will not free us from that spiritual prison, at best it will only give it a new face. 

I enjoy your comments also, Pogi!  You are a good guy! 

Legislation may not completely free us from addiction, but it can help slow down the spread of it.

I watched two RM loved ones struggle with the addiction, and attempt to deal with the toxic shame.  After three years, they left their Temple Marriages, wives, children, the Church and even belief that there is a God.  We have struggled for years to get back to the semblance of a normal life.  But in the back of our minds, and sooner or later in every conversation, our thoughts are drawn to praying for those loved ones-- especially the grand children they left behind, or the wives (particularly one of them,) they left.  The one former wife works a full time job to hold her and her daughter's lives together.  She works out of her home and is with her daughter all the time, except when she is in pre-school or over at our home.  The Mother is continually exhausted.  Her former husband moved out of state, so she has no break from the responsibility, other than us.  Her daughter, one of the sweetest little girls on earth, stays with us one night per week.  She'll be cheerful.  We'll play some games.  Then she'll put her head down on the table.  "What's the matter honey?  How are you doing?"  "I'm just sad." she says.  Probing, before we distract with another activity, we ask "Do you know why?"  "No, I don't."

I agree that guilt is a better task master than shame in encouraging an addict to recovery.  Every person must one day come to terms with their own challenges and do what it takes to overcome them.  I am not concerned about your recovery or our loved ones' recoveries so much.  I am concerned about the women who have been raped to produce the pornography.  I am concerned about broken families, children, spouses, grandparents left in the wake of that addiction-- the years of sadness, distress, fatigue and confusion caused by that victim-less activity.

When I was a boy, pornography wasn't as easily accessible.  You had to buy it from a live person, which was a deterant.  You couldn't just hide in your closet with a laptop.  Consequently, most in my generation were able to avoid many of the effects that today's youth deal with every day from sexting to porn sites flashing them as they go about their daily net surfing.  Today, the average 11 year old has already been exposed to hard core pornography.  I believe if we had laws that required people to subscribe that wanted pornography, much grief could be avoided as it was when I was young.

Here is a 2012 article from Psychology Today that speaks of changing brain activity caused by early onset of porn: "https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/real-healing/201208/overexposed-and-under-prepared-the-effects-early-exposure-sexual-content

I believe it is a public health issue.  I believe nearly every American family has been impacted by a loved one and their pornography addiction, and other attendant addictions.

Bernard Gui's quotations from Jacob 2 and 3 should not be taken lightly:  

15 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

34 And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before; and ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done.

35 Behold, ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren. Ye have broken the hearts of your tender wives, and lost the confidence of your children, because of your bad examples before them; and the sobbings of their hearts ascend up to God against you. And because of the strictness of the word of God, which cometh down against you, many hearts died, pierced with deep wounds.

Jacob 3

10 Wherefore, ye shall remember your children, how that ye have grieved their hearts because of the example that ye have set before them; and also, remember that ye may, because of your filthiness, bring your children unto destruction, and their sins be heaped upon your heads at the last day.

11 O my brethren, hearken unto my words; arouse the faculties of your souls; shake yourselves that ye may awake from the slumber of death; and loose yourselves from the pains of hell that ye may not become angels to the devil, to be cast into that lake of fire and brimstone which is the second death.

 

There is a judgment coming to pornography addicts and their unfortunate families.  God is not mocked.  We as a nation, need to repent in many areas of our lives, and turn back to God.  Laws that are passed do not need to be under the auspices of religion.  They can be passed to help ensure public safety.  I see nothing wrong with alluding to the laws of God, as our Founders did in the preamble to the Constitution: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."  But, to avoid controversy, it may make more sense to refer to the brain science of pornography, the broken homes and families, etc. as we pass laws to protect our children from the devastating effects of their fathers (and occasionally mothers,) pornography addictions.

I do not see pornography as a blessing of liberty to our posterity.  I see it as a curse, hedging up the way of all liberty and causing a blight on our country.  It is the perfect enemy of religion.  Look at our country, and the declining membership in our churches and faith in God.  Look at the decline in marriages.  Many of those negative impacts on our society can be traced back to rampant pornography availability, in my opinion.

Here is a 2013 Huffington Post article that headlines:   Porn Sites Get More Visitors Each Month Than Netflix, Amazon And Twitter Combined   https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/03/internet-porn-stats_n_3187682.html 

That's my two cents for today.  I adamantly disagree with the premise that we should not turn to government to help fix this problem because Pornography is a Liberty issue.  It is a public health and safety issue that is exploding in our communities.

[pogi]

19 minutes ago, Meerkat said:

Legislation may not completely free us from addiction, but it can help slow down the spread of it.

I believe if we had laws that required people to subscribe that wanted pornography, much grief could be avoided as it was when I was young.

I am not opposed to requiring an opt in option for adults - a .XXX domain, or something like that.  I think we should give families all the tools possible to regulate this in their own homes, I agree with that.  I don't think it would be possible to regulate or verify the age of users, but I am not opposed to that type of legislation.  What I am opposed to is prohibition.  Making an already shameful addiction illegal would only deepen the toxicity of it.  It would turn people to the dark web.  The dark web would explode overnight. We don't want to expose the average Joe porn user to the dark web to get his fix - bad, bad idea, there is really, really bad stuff there we simply don't want to expose addicts to!

More to respond to, but I wanted to get this off first before I go home.  Thanks for your reply. 

[SamuelTheLamanite]

9 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I was physically compelled to stay at the table until I ate my broccoli. Is that a threat of violence?

I thought Mansquatch was talking about adults.  Is it okay to force Mansquatch to eat his broccoli? 

10 hours ago, Mansquatch said:

Forcing someone to do something that is good for them is evil. 

But the world is trying to force us to look at pornography. Pornography is everywhere and 4 in 10 men get highly addicted to pornography. 

On 3/19/2018 at 10:06 PM, california boy said:

You do realize that your response had NOTHING to do with what I posted.  You gotta read the entire post before you respond.

No is my answer. You can't blame the church for a divorce that happens. Some people blame the church for everything, but never realize that life is complicated. The church is innocent until proven guilty. You can't prove the church is destroying marriages.  You won't find long-term prospective cohort studies showing the church is destroying some families. If you don't know what prospective cohort studies are read the article

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prospective_cohort_study

20 hours ago, Meerkat said:

I agree with this. Pornography harms everyone who comes near it. Rape is generally illegal.  Prostitution  is illegal in most areas.  Pornography is committing sex acts for pay = prostitution.  Should be illegal. 

Rape is generally illegal? What are you saying?

20 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

The sad part of the story is how his addiction cost him dearly -  he lost everything of value to him. His family lost so much, too. He moved away, so I’ve lost track of him, but I always hope he has been able to put things back together. The other sad thing is that there are so many more who are experiencing the same thing. It’s a hard road, but redemption is available.

Brother Gui,

What can I do to fight pornography? How can I rescue my brothers and sisters from the destructive power of pornography? Have can I save families?

Edited March 21, 2018 by SamuelTheLamanite

[The Nehor]

43 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Some people blame the church for everything, but never realize that life is complicated.

Are you aware of the irony of you making that statement?

[Meerkat]

2 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Rape is generally illegal? What are you saying?

Generally was a misplaced word.  I'm not sure how that got in there.  Thanks for the correction.  My point was that there are some elements in pornography that are already illegal that have nothing to do with religion.

Edited March 21, 2018 by Meerkat

[SamuelTheLamanite]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Are you aware of the irony of you making that statement?

Why? It is true some enemies of the church think the church destroys families, but our critics are completely wrong. Some people are too simplistic and only look for excuses to blame the church. The truth is there are no long-term prospective cohort studies showing our religion is destroying some families, but our enemies are not interested in proving their accusations. Our critics are very biased.

32 minutes ago, Meerkat said:

 My point was that there are some elements in pornography that are already illegal that have nothing to do with religion.

We have to get our morality from religion. Our country was funded by christian principles. We Americans send believing christian leaders to our legislative branch because it is the right thing to do. A leader has to seek inspiration from God. Making laws that have nothing to do with religion isn't the way.  The atheist communist Soviet Union fell because it rejected God.     

10 hours ago, kllindley said:

Preach, brother! It is my hope that people will listen to your perspective and understand the truths you are sharing. 

Four in 10 men are addicted to the destructive power of pornography.

6 hours ago, pogi said:

 Making an already shameful addiction illegal would only deepen the toxicity of it.

You mean it would make seven in nine men addicted to pornography?

Edited March 21, 2018 by SamuelTheLamanite

[Bernard Gui]

11 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

What can I do to fight pornography? How can I rescue my brothers and sisters from the destructive power of pornography? Have can I save families?

Great question!

What would we do if there were a rampant communicable deadly disease in our community? What would we do if bad people were outside our home trying to break down the doors to get in?  We would do all we can to protect those we love, no? The pioneers circled the wagons when danger approached. We can’t provide foolproof 100% guaranteed protection, we can’t lock them away, we can’t keep constant eyes on them, but we can do a lot to circle our wagons and to keep the wolves away from the lambs. 

Support politicians and leaders who recognize the danger and propose reasoned solutions. Encourage Church leaders to address the issue as needed. Complain to media and advertisers when their content crosses the line. Do not patronize businesses, entertainment, or websites that promote promiscuity or disseminate pornography. Use parental blocks on all internet and cable devices with strong password protections.  Do not let kids have electronic devices including and especially anything with screens in their bedrooms. Monitor music on radios and iPods. Check viewing content history for porn sites. Monitor and limit screen time. Do not use screens as babysitters or pacifiers. No computers, tablets, or phones allowed in private unsupervised rooms.....keep them in lighted, inside-windowed, and well-trafficked áreas. If kids have phones, put undefeatable content locks on them. Lock them up before bedtime. If they get caught using them in school, back up the teacher or principal. No sleepovers at friends’ or relatives’ homes. No going into a friend’s home if there are no parents there. Know who their friends and their friend’s parents are. Talk with the parents.  Strict curfews for teens. Talk with children and discuss what to do so they can plan ahead for a proper reaction when they are inevitably exposed to pornography. Warn them of the dangers involved. Stress respect for self and others. Don’t underplay the negative effects or porn and promiscuity. But don’t instill fear and self-loathing. If a family member admits to or gets caught using porn, don’t panic, don’t use anger or shame, don’t trot them off to the bishop unless they want to talk with him for guidance and feel comfortable doing that, immediately take away the offending device or materials, have regular check-ups for continuing problems, don’t let them isolate themselves. Find good activities that will keep them engaged and busy with other good kids and adults. If your measures fail and it becomes habitual or addictive, seek professional help and stay strong. If their usage messes you up, seek support. Pray like crazy and be vigilant like an Asian tiger mom. If all this fails, try the Alma/Corianton interview and follow up with increased love. Hope for the best, but teach the true principles of repentance and the Atonement for the times when they will probably need them. The Atonement covers this.Then hope they gained wisdom from you and can govern themselves when they leave your influence.

Edited March 21, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

16 hours ago, Mansquatch said:

Forcing someone to do something that is good for them is evil. 

My mom made me drink a glass of sagebrush tea every day and brush my teeth before I went to bed. My dad forced me to stand on the sidewalk and look both ways before I crossed the street. I turned out somewhat ok, I think.

[Mansquatch]

4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

My mom made me drink a glass of sagebrush tea every day and brush my teeth before I went to bed. My dad forced me to stand on the sidewalk and look both ways before I crossed the street. I turned out somewhat ok, I think.

Not if you need government violence to keep you doing what is good as an adult. You seem to also have missed the part where I say that if your parents threatened or actually used violence against you they were being evil.

[california boy]

11 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

 

No is my answer. You can't blame the church for a divorce that happens. Some people blame the church for everything, but never realize that life is complicated. The church is innocent until proven guilty. You can't prove the church is destroying marriages.  You won't find long-term prospective cohort studies showing the church is destroying some families. If you don't know what prospective cohort studies are read the article

This is the second time you have given this answer even after I told you that this answer has NOTHING to do with what I wrote. If you would have bothered to read what I wrote the first time or the second time you would have realized that I was not blaming the church for anything. Which is why your comment has nothing to do with what I wrote. 

‘People don’t take your posts seriously because you don’t think about what you write. You aren’t defending the church.  You write irrelevant posts that have no substance and you don’t respect other posters when you reply with answers that have nothing to do with what they are saying. 

[pogi]

16 hours ago, Meerkat said:

I am concerned about the women who have been raped to produce the pornography. 

I wouldn't give any credence to these fake statistics that Sam Lam is spitting out about 1 in 3 women being forced/raped in the production.  That is flat out bologna.  I have repeatedly asked him for a CFR which he has failed to provide.  This is not some secret underground industry that is not regulated, It is a legitimate industry leader bringing in 12-14 billion/year according to some estimates.  The workers are well paid celebrities. Sam Lams stats are ridiculous.  I am not trying to defend the morality of the industry, but fake news is destructive.  If you want to find the stuff that Sam Lam is talking about, you mostly have to go to the dark web to find it. 

Here is what prohibition would do, it would turn a 14 billion dollar industry into a criminal powerhouse.  The demand is not going to magically disappear.  Again, it will simply send users to the dark web - an unregulated place of complete anonymity and absolute filth - the last place on earth you want to send the average Joe porn addict.   Regulations and legal safeguards for workers would be gone.  Workers would now be criminals, making it harder to find willing workers.  This in turn would lead to greater human trafficking to fuel the industry.  My point is that if you are concerned about women being forced in the production, you should be anti-prohibition.

[pogi]

9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

The pioneers circled the wagons when danger approached. We can’t provide foolproof 100% guaranteed protection, we can’t lock them away, we can’t keep constant eyes on them, but we can do a lot to circle our wagons and to keep the wolves away from the lambs. 

I like this imagery!  Addicts need the emotional/spiritual support of their community and their families more then anything.  I like the idea of circling the wagons, but instead of facing outside the circle fighting against imaginary threats, the community should be facing the scared little child who is in hiding and trembling in the circle.  That child needs attention, love and support.   But too often his loved ones are unknowingly diverting their attention away from him, facing outside the circle in fear of porn.  The community needs to see and acknowledge that child, because he is a victim as much as anybody in this.   He needs to feel safe to come out.  That is the truth of the matter.  If the community can draw that child out of isolation, then we will all recognize how powerless porn really is.  Porn has no power in and of itself, it is not the real threat.  Until we as a community and church recognize that truth, we will continue to see very few results in addiction recovery.  Fighting against porn is a failed system.  It doesn't work.   

I would just like to emphasize that the wolves are not outside the circled wagons.  The real deadly wolf is not porn.  I can't emphasize that enough.  I know it is a pretty radical paradigm shift to think this way, but this perspective is the only hope and salvation against addiction.  The real threat and the real wolf is inside the circled wagons already, it is already in the heart of the addict.  Porn is powerless without the fuel of toxic shame.  It has no teeth in and of itself; it has no chains; no power to bind; it is nothing to fear.  We don't need to feel threatened by it if we can understand that principle.  That is  not to say that we shouldn't be vigilant in keeping this filth out of our homes and lives, because toxic shame is always a threat.  But when we understand and face the real enemy, it has no power over us.

9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Stress respect for self and others...don’t instill fear and self-loathing. If a family member admits to or gets caught using porn, don’t panic, don’t use anger or shame, don’t trot them off to the bishop unless they want to talk with him for guidance and feel comfortable doing that, immediately take away the offending device or materials, have regular check-ups for continuing problems, don’t let them isolate themselves.

 This is it!

[Bernard Gui]

3 hours ago, Mansquatch said:

Not if you need government violence to keep you doing what is good as an adult. You seem to also have missed the part where I say that if your parents threatened or actually used violence against you they were being evil.

All law is enforced with the threat of violence. I was responding to your single line post. 

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

 

‘People don’t take your posts seriously because you don’t think about what you write. You aren’t defending the church.  You write irrelevant posts that have no substance and you don’t respect other posters when you reply with answers that have nothing to do with what they are saying. 

This.

[The Nehor]

11 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Why? It is true some enemies of the church think the church destroys families, but our critics are completely wrong. Some people are too simplistic and only look for excuses to blame the church. The truth is there are no long-term prospective cohort studies showing our religion is destroying some families, but our enemies are not interested in proving their accusations. Our critics are very biased.

You did miss the irony. You are condemning others for simplicity while offering nothing but platitudes, simplistic understanding of a concept, and simplistic and impractical solutions.

[RevTestament]

On 3/17/2018 at 12:01 AM, The Nehor said:

Yes, and since divorce is one of the greatest destroyers of families I suggest we ban marriage as it is a prerequisite for divorce. If you do not marry you cannot divorce. It is the first step on that slippery slope.

Marriage: Not Even Once

Since everyone here is a fan of Ben Shapiro, I thought I might point out that he favors getting the government out of the marriage business altogether. I believe the tax policies of the US have been quite destructive of marriage. Besides the original "marriage penalty" where the tax rate is higher for combined incomes, under Reagan the situation actually became worse where two people, heads of households, receiving a child tax credit could lose that credit by getting married - this is a great dissauader from marriage since $10,000 or more in refundable tax credits could disappear simply by getting married. Eliminating government-sanctioned marriage would have a far sweeping impact on government law - not only tax law but inheritance law, family law, etc. This would be such a profound change, that I don't think it will ever happen, but imho, the federal gubbermint has intruded all too far into the family. This may be one way of eliminating the social engineering through governmental policy which has had a bad impact on society. Of course it may have opposite and unforeseen adverse affects. However, leaving marriage to the spiritual or religious realm does make sense. I suppose next there will be some suit against marriage altogether as a form of religiously established laws.

[Jeanne]

4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

You did miss the irony. You are condemning others for simplicity while offering nothing but platitudes, simplistic understanding of a concept, and simplistic and impractical solutions.

The thing is..to us "said" critics...we have actually watched our families being torn apart...for some families it was a duty to do so.  We don't think the church destroys family...we have seen it.  Not to all families..but it has been done...of course..it is the same way for those who convert and leave their core family religion to be baptized...but that is just another confirmation of what happens.

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Jeanne said:

The thing is..to us "said" critics...we have actually watched our families being torn apart...for some families it was a duty to do so.  We don't think the church destroys family...we have seen it.  Not to all families..but it has been done...of course..it is the same way for those who convert and leave their core family religion to be baptized...but that is just another confirmation of what happens.

Of course the gospel sometimes tears families apart. It is not the goal obviously but it can happen.

[Danzo]

3 hours ago, RevTestament said:

Since everyone here is a fan of Ben Shapiro, I thought I might point out that he favors getting the government out of the marriage business altogether. I believe the tax policies of the US have been quite destructive of marriage. Besides the original "marriage penalty" where the tax rate is higher for combined incomes, under Reagan the situation actually became worse where two people, heads of households, receiving a child tax credit could lose that credit by getting married - this is a great dissauader from marriage since $10,000 or more in refundable tax credits could disappear simply by getting married. Eliminating government-sanctioned marriage would have a far sweeping impact on government law - not only tax law but inheritance law, family law, etc. This would be such a profound change, that I don't think it will ever happen, but imho, the federal gubbermint has intruded all too far into the family. This may be one way of eliminating the social engineering through governmental policy which has had a bad impact on society. Of course it may have opposite and unforeseen adverse affects. However, leaving marriage to the spiritual or religious realm does make sense. I suppose next there will be some suit against marriage altogether as a form of religiously established laws.

The amount one would lose by getting married (earned income credit) would not be more than $6,318.00

But you are right, there is a significant marriage penalty built into the tax law, especially for poor people.  Its almost like those that developed the earned income credit deliberately wanted to encourage people to shack up instead of getting married. Many social safety net programs also discourage marriage.

Immigration law also discourages marriage in many cases as well.

 

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, RevTestament said:

Since everyone here is a fan of Ben Shapiro, I thought I might point out that he favors getting the government out of the marriage business altogether. I believe the tax policies of the US have been quite destructive of marriage. Besides the original "marriage penalty" where the tax rate is higher for combined incomes, under Reagan the situation actually became worse where two people, heads of households, receiving a child tax credit could lose that credit by getting married - this is a great dissauader from marriage since $10,000 or more in refundable tax credits could disappear simply by getting married. Eliminating government-sanctioned marriage would have a far sweeping impact on government law - not only tax law but inheritance law, family law, etc. This would be such a profound change, that I don't think it will ever happen, but imho, the federal gubbermint has intruded all too far into the family. This may be one way of eliminating the social engineering through governmental policy which has had a bad impact on society. Of course it may have opposite and unforeseen adverse affects. However, leaving marriage to the spiritual or religious realm does make sense. I suppose next there will be some suit against marriage altogether as a form of religiously established laws.

Current tax law benefits one income two parent households and is mostly neutral towards dual income households though in individual cases it sometimes falls more heavily one way or the other.

I see the desire to separate marriage and government as a misguided attempt at keeping things ‘pure’ for lack of a better word with no benefit and abundant danger.

[SamuelTheLamanite]

9 hours ago, The Nehor said:

You did miss the irony. You are condemning others for simplicity while offering nothing but platitudes, simplistic understanding of a concept, and simplistic and impractical solutions.

What is my simplistic and impractical solution?

5 hours ago, Jeanne said:

The thing is..to us "said" critics...we have actually watched our families being torn apart...for some families it was a duty to do so.  We don't think the church destroys family...we have seen it.  Not to all families..but it has been done...of course..it is the same way for those who convert and leave their core family religion to be baptized...but that is just another confirmation of what happens.

Pornography destroys families, not the church. The church strengthens the family.

11 hours ago, pogi said:

I wouldn't give any credence to these fake statistics that Sam Lam is spitting out about 1 in 3 women being forced/raped in the production.  That is flat out bologna.  I have repeatedly asked him for a CFR which he has failed to provide.  This is not some secret underground industry that is not regulated, It is a legitimate industry leader bringing in 12-14 billion/year according to some estimates.  The workers are well paid celebrities. Sam Lams stats are ridiculous.  I am not trying to defend the morality of the industry, but fake news is destructive. 

I retract. Pogi, tell Jeanne how pornography was destroying your life, and how the church is saving it.

12 hours ago, california boy said:

Are you willing to throw 25 to 30% active members of the church in jail?

My answer is no.

On 3/20/2018 at 10:21 PM, Meerkat said:

  It is a public health and safety issue that is exploding in our communities.

Pornography is everywhere and 4 in 10 men are addicted to pornography.  

[kllindley]

21 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Four in 10 men are addicted to the destructive power of pornography.

I'm kinda nervous to even give this any attention, but what does this have to do with my comment?